Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall: Visit to the US - November 1-8, 2005


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Lady Marmalade said:
The colors fit right in with the fall weather in New York, deep and rich. I agree about the collier. I think with that neckline no necklace or collier was needed, but regal nonetheless. :)

Indeed, deep and rich was the way to go "Lady M" ;)

I am a HUGE fan of these necklines so anything like this is sure to get my thumbs up!

Maybe a few cultured pearl strands & button earings (would have looked absolutely fab against the rich material), but the centrepiece of the collier is (I think) rather ugly.

"MII"

Then again, we cant see her ears.lol.
 
Last edited:
For a fall evening, the dress looks very appropriate and different. Great colour, too. Prince Charles is only wearing a suit, not a dinner jacket. Her cocktail dress length matches his outfit. I never quite understand the dress codes if the man wears a suit, but the lady wears full length evening gown.
 
Just so as to not confuse people, I meant that if this were a gown it would be perfect (in my opinion) for say something like a State Banquet or even a Coronation or Enthronement ceremony etc.

"MII"
 
The pink suit was very nice however- the Union Jack handbag was a bit tasteles... I however don't think it's ever okay to wear or display your national flag on anything other than a mast, so I may be alone in my rebuke...
 
It was at a museum of modern art. So a handbag like that seems fitting to me. It is different and modern.

every reporter keeps saying that their visit to the WTC site was emotional. I looked at photos and they seemed more shocked or something than they looked overcome with emotion.....I think it was interesting how Camilla placed the flowers instead of Charles....
 
I know there are laws in some countries forbidding the use of the flag in applications that might appear frivolous, like clothes, accessories, or dishtowels, but that isn't the case in the UK. The flag gets stuck on just about everything at one time or another.
 
Charles and Camilla at the Modern Art Museum in New York Tuesday, Nov. 1, 2005.
From Colourpress



 
Last edited:
Charles and Camilla at the World Trade Center Site on November 1, 2005.
From Colourpress.




 
zeap said:
The pink suit was very nice however- the Union Jack handbag was a bit tasteles... I however don't think it's ever okay to wear or display your national flag on anything other than a mast, so I may be alone in my rebuke...

Considering the fact that C&C are in the US to promote British trade & industry I think its a lovely way to start getting the message across. :)
 
Without the wrap the dress looks much better.
 
don't think camilla wears cultured pearls, she only wears the really real and rare ones (but warren would know perhaps)

Margrethe II said:
Not a fan of the cultured pearl collier however. I dont like the centrepiece.

"MII"
 
Have just read through the last ten pages. These calmer waters are such a pleasure; it was rough enough to belly-up the SS Poseidon back there.


Margrethe II said:
HRH the Duchess of Cornwall does look very lovely, I must say... Somewhat Elizabethan in appearance.
I thought this too; from a distance the white neckline gives the appearance of an Elizabethan ruff. As to the dress, I think we have learnt from experience that velvet doesn't photograph very well. It probably looked quite chic to those who were there. Camilla looked stunning in pink.
 
susan alicia said:
don't think camilla wears cultured pearls, she only wears the really real and rare ones (but warren would know perhaps)
Sorry, I prefer diamonds. Pearls have never really done it for me. No glitter. :)
 
Camilla's sequined clutch was a nice play on themes. The pattern was Union Jack like but the sequins was not. The bag was symbolic just as everything one sees on various countries national days. It was a very telling touch.

grevinnan
 
I just now noticed her handbag and loved it! What a hip and modern touch and something you would never expect a royal to have....very cool.

From Yahoo News:

The duchess also carried a cheeky, sequined Union Jack handbag by designer Lulu Guinness.
 
Last edited:
I thought camila looked fab on both days!
 
I love the neckline of the dress but the bodice is not very flattering at all. Its too loose around the chest. I think the right undergarments can fix a lot of figure flaws, one doesnt need to hide them under baggy cuts. And I dont like the hairstyle from the reception either. It looks like Camilla's about ready to take off with those two wings around her head.
I tried not to say anything at first but I've got to be honest. The duchess can look better.
 
I believe it's simply embossed with the Prince of Wales' crest.
 
Just saw them arrive at the White House....Milla's looking good.
 
She looks nice I think she is wearing navy blue.
 
Shame on the New York Post for calling Camilla a frump. Perhaps the writer has no idea about chic. :mad:
You also have an English 'woman' called Lisa Hartwick, who lives in Edinburgh following them around with nasty placards. :mad:
So if you meet either of these 'women', squash them!:D
 
#1: Prince Charles and his wife Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall arrive at Andrews Air Force Base outside Washington on Wednesday, Nov. 2, 2005. The royal couple brought their U.S. tour to the nation's capital where a private lunch and a lavish White House dinner with President Bush and first lady Laura Bush awaited them. (AP Photo/Kevin Wolf) Britain's Prince Charles and Camilla , Duchess of Cornwall, are greeted by U.S. President George W. Bush and first lady Laura Bush upon their arrival for lunch at the White House in Washington, D.C., November 2, 2005. The royal couple, on an eight-day visit to the U.S., will be honored at a black tie dinner in the State Dining Room of the White House this evening.
#1-5: AP
#6-10: Reuters
 

Attachments

  • ap1.jpg
    ap1.jpg
    73.1 KB · Views: 133
  • ap2.jpg
    ap2.jpg
    80.3 KB · Views: 131
  • ap3.jpg
    ap3.jpg
    68.7 KB · Views: 143
  • ap4.jpg
    ap4.jpg
    76.7 KB · Views: 131
  • r.jpg
    r.jpg
    68.3 KB · Views: 151
  • r1.jpg
    r1.jpg
    63.3 KB · Views: 133
  • r2.jpg
    r2.jpg
    54.8 KB · Views: 181
  • ap.jpg
    ap.jpg
    57.6 KB · Views: 137
  • r3.jpg
    r3.jpg
    77.1 KB · Views: 127
  • r4.jpg
    r4.jpg
    78.3 KB · Views: 126
#1-5: AP
#6-10: Reuters
 

Attachments

  • r.jpg
    r.jpg
    60.9 KB · Views: 114
  • r4.jpg
    r4.jpg
    69.6 KB · Views: 120
  • r3.jpg
    r3.jpg
    72.6 KB · Views: 123
  • r2.jpg
    r2.jpg
    85.8 KB · Views: 119
  • r1.jpg
    r1.jpg
    73.2 KB · Views: 124
  • ap4.jpg
    ap4.jpg
    72.7 KB · Views: 134
  • ap3.jpg
    ap3.jpg
    52 KB · Views: 144
  • ap2.jpg
    ap2.jpg
    70.8 KB · Views: 122
  • ap1.jpg
    ap1.jpg
    63.8 KB · Views: 119
  • ap.jpg
    ap.jpg
    92 KB · Views: 125
#1-10: Reuters
 

Attachments

  • r.jpg
    r.jpg
    61.3 KB · Views: 131
  • r1.jpg
    r1.jpg
    83.4 KB · Views: 119
  • r2.jpg
    r2.jpg
    54.7 KB · Views: 119
  • r3.jpg
    r3.jpg
    54.5 KB · Views: 150
  • r4.jpg
    r4.jpg
    76.5 KB · Views: 131
  • r5.jpg
    r5.jpg
    69.9 KB · Views: 123
  • r6.jpg
    r6.jpg
    104.3 KB · Views: 135
  • r7.jpg
    r7.jpg
    54.5 KB · Views: 112
  • r8.jpg
    r8.jpg
    76.4 KB · Views: 132
  • r9.jpg
    r9.jpg
    65 KB · Views: 118
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom